Before this day there was only one bitcoin mining service (and NO pools with open registration), so I decided to create some alternative for people that prefer simple reward sharing scheme and fast payments. Feel free to participate with same miners as most of you already use for solo GPU or pooled GPU/CPU mining.Service fee is 3%, no block confirmation is needed (your reward won't be recalled if block doesn't gets confirmed).

EDIT: Now you can try some new exciting feature - optional Pay-Per-Share mode is enabled in my pool. You can choose payments method for any of your workers, look at your account page for workers configuration. Current rate is 0.00002209487837767 BTC per share.

Our advantages

We notify your bitcoin miner about new block with the help of long polling. This allows us minimize the number of stale shares. (You can get up to a several percents higher results). Currently this mode is supported by latest version of poclbm OpenCL miner.Protocol description

We provide e-mail notifications on worker failure

We pay you for every solved block, even if it later fails to mature (up to 1.2% more)

You can take your reward at ANY moment, just press "Instant payout" button

You can choose between two payment modes

We credit your balance instantly, without 120 blocks delay

We have e-mail notifications on worker failure

We have open and free registration and do not limit the number of connections or users

If you already know how to use RPC miners, you can register a new account at http://deepbit.net and join the test, using deepbit.net hostname and 8332 port. Your e-mail is your login.You can run separate miners on one account or create additional workers.

m0mchil's poclbm is recommended, DiabloMiner, puddinpop and jgarzik miners should work fine too.

Long Polling is working now, so you can download latest poclbm miner and use it with DeepBit.This new feature will eliminate stale shares and your mining efficiency may rise up to ~1.7% more on average (depends on your GPU speed and luck).

Please remove the word "fair" from your thread title. Implying that Slush is purposefully "unfair" is an offensive patently false lie propagated through an unwillingness to understand statistics. (and pure malice by some)

I didn't said anything about Slush, it's just you.

That's why I said "implying".

There is only one reason to use the word "fair" and noting that another pool exists; that is to brazenly imply that the other pool is "unfair". You are openly stating that what sets your pool apart from the other pool is the reward method.

who are you to tell people what words to put in their thread titles and what not?i could also tell you to remove your posting from this thread, not only implying that [Tycho] has anything against slush's pool (which is not the case afaik), but also implying slush has something against competition (which is also not the case afaik).but don't worry, i wont do that.

and i didnt see anything about one pool being more or less fair than any other pool,it's up to the users to decide which one to use and what's most "fair" in their eyes.

Slush has shown the statistical charts proving that the score based reward system distributes just as equally as a shares based reward system./quote]

...Over time. "Fair" has more than one meaning in this context.

For people running GPU miners with hundreds of mh/s, the expected payout over time converges with reality in just a few blocks. For those of us running under 10mh/s, the payout per block varies radically - I've had a few lucky blocks where I get a whole BitDime as my share, and I've had full days where I only managed to solve a share every fifth block and even then only pulled down on the order of 1E-4BTC per block.

So Slush's pool, while "fair", trades slow-miner convergence rate for discouraging a particular type of cheating. A purely proportional pool converges faster, but allows a style of participation that some people might consider "cheating" (though if you legitimately contribute work to the pool, I don't know that I'd throw too many stones just because someone found the best way to split their contributions across multiple pools to maximize payouts - You could just as well call the entire concept of "pools" cheating, because it deviates from the Satoshi-intended winner-take-all style of BTC generation).

That said, Tycho, how do you plan to avoid massive cheating without block verification? Accepting all shares as equal, no problem; but what stops contibutors from simply lying?

I don't beg - If I do something to deserve your BTC, you can find my address on the invoice.

[Tycho]: I think your calculation of "Average speed in last 5 minutes" is wrong. It shows that I have 14.20 MH/s with my CPU (which I wish I had) whereas I have ~1.4 MH/s now.

your "Average speed in last 5 minutes" is calculated by the number of shares you submitted,in lucky times (were you find lots of diff1 hashes in a very short time) you might see much more speed than you actually do, in unlucky times, you see less speed.overall it seems pretty accurate, an increased timeframe for calculation might improve accuracy a bit though.

[Tycho]: I think your calculation of "Average speed in last 5 minutes" is wrong. It shows that I have 14.20 MH/s with my CPU (which I wish I had) whereas I have ~1.4 MH/s now.

your "Average speed in last 5 minutes" is calculated by the number of shares you submitted,in lucky times (were you find lots of diff1 hashes in a very short time) you might see much more speed than you actually do, in unlucky times, you see less speed.overall it seems pretty accurate, an increased timeframe for calculation might improve accuracy a bit though.

Yes, it's like "luck meter" because when it shows 14 MH/s, you have same luck as someone with 14 MH/s :)May be i'll change it to 10 minutes, but it's initial purpose was to show the variation.

Slush has shown the statistical charts proving that the score based reward system distributes just as equally as a shares based reward system.

...Over time. "Fair" has more than one meaning in this context.

For people running GPU miners with hundreds of mh/s, the expected payout over time converges with reality in just a few blocks. For those of us running under 10mh/s, the payout per block varies radically - I've had a few lucky blocks where I get a whole BitDime as my share, and I've had full days where I only managed to solve a share every fifth block and even then only pulled down on the order of 1E-4BTC per block.

So Slush's pool, while "fair", trades slow-miner convergence rate for discouraging a particular type of cheating. A purely proportional pool converges faster, but allows a style of participation that some people might consider "cheating" (though if you legitimately contribute work to the pool, I don't know that I'd throw too many stones just because someone found the best way to split their contributions across multiple pools to maximize payouts - You could just as well call the entire concept of "pools" cheating, because it deviates from the Satoshi-intended winner-take-all style of BTC generation).

That said, Tycho, how do you plan to avoid massive cheating without block verification? Accepting all shares as equal, no problem; but what stops contibutors from simply lying?

As I posted in Slush's thread, even a CPU Miner trends towards strong convergence on the order of after 1-2 weeks. Are you planning on only mining for 1-2 days?